The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1887-06-30

SH, io NiuVCiles on nm. Laughter When
Col. Fellows had done with Moloney he
Turned e ms attention to Disbecker, another
il9 1re IN the great scheme. whom he scorn-
tuily denominated as a man who was a.
traffcker in mems honesty He laid stress
upon Dlsbecker's receiving SIT, 600, Belding
ooo,O0O, and Phelps $4,000, and pointedly
asked tne jury why Sharp should pay 50
CHARGING THE JURY.
After short recess Judge Barrett began
hls cnafge to the jury. He read the law
on o3n bribery and went on to say that the only
orecG evidence that money had been given
was that one DeLacy had given money. 1t
Is not necessary that the person charged
gave money with his own hand or made a
corrupt agreement in person, or, in other
words, made an agreement in accordance
Win the laws of contract, but if there was
an understanding that one was to give and
the other was to receive a bribe, then guilt
Is established. DeLacy is the fountain head
ana all VINO are proven to be connected near
10 or far away from the fountain head are
guilty. Ii DeIacy received money from
Richmond and Richmond again from Sharp,
then Sharp is guilty. If Sharp had guilty
knowledge of the scheme, and assisted or
aoetted III anyway he is guilty of the crime
charged. The defendant asked for trial sep
arately and if the jury finds that he is con
nected with bribery by either of the ways
specified they must find him guilty of the
crime charged. Justice Barrett believed
that it had been clearly shown that Fullgraff
was bribed, who bribed him
WHO BRIBED DELACYg
If the jury believed DeLacy bribed him
with $4,000, then, OF course, the jury must
ask Immediately who bribed DeLacy? For
no one can suppose that DeIacy bribed him
on his own account, for he derived no ben
etlt from the passage Of the franchise Any
person who was behind DeLacy, who aided
or abetted in bribing Fullgraff was as guilty
as DeLacy. If you find that Fullgraff was
bribed, and that $500,000 was raised by
Kerr and Foshay, and you come to the CON
clusion that that sum was not raised for the
road, and that that sum really went to the
corruption of the Board of Aldermen; if
You find this to be So aud you have abund-
ant direct and circumstantial evidence
that point, and you believe that Kerr and
FoShay did this, and concealed it from
Sharp-if you find they did this,
because of their own interest and notwith-
standing the far greater benefits which
Sharp was 10 reap from it and Sharp was
ignorant, then you must acquit him. g. You
are the exclusive judges of the evidence and
IL NY VI Jl6 6Nlu6uC6 HAS SeSIleu
to impart my opinions on it to you, | trust
you will discard and disregard it. This is q
case of the utmost Importance to the people
and indeed a matter of life and death to the
defendant. | am not conscious of having
ruled out part of evidence to which the
defendant was entitled. You will not be
influenced by public clamor.
sHARP's AGEDNEss.
The defendant is an old, feeble, infirm
man, as has been said by his counsel You
will, however, not permit that to waive you
in the discharge of your duty. 1t is harder
for old age to suffer, yet we all know that
our greatest sufferings are frequently at the
end of our lives. 1t must be so; it is the
rule of the infinite, and so now all senti-
ment, passion and sympathy should be cast
outside the temple of justice. Here only
reason should rule.
Mr.. Parsons, of the counsel for the de-
fense, entered several objections, but his
honor overruled him, and said the jury was
already tired out. The jury then went out.
RETURN OF THE JURY.
Ten minutes later there was rush again
for the court room.
Judge Barrett resumed his seat on the
bench Sharp and his counsel took their
seats. Two minutes later the jury filed into
their seats and were asked if they had agreed
upon a verdict.
I'VE have" was the answer.
Guilty or not guilty"
mot guilty. mean guilty, your honor,
guilty."
"Jacob Sharp" said the court, show old
are your
Seventy years next month"
"Where do you live!"
''No. 334 West Twenty third street."
The jurors here consulted a moment and
recommended the prisoner to mercy.
Sharp heard the verdict with no apparent
trepidation He sat quietly in his seat with
an air of disinterestedness until Sheriff
Grant let the court know that he was ready
to care for the convict. The lawyers for
the defense evinced more chagrin at the re-
suit than the convicted one.
HOW SHARP TOOK 1T.
When the Sheriff notified Sharp to join
him the prisoner arose coolly and shook
hands with his counsel all around. Reach
ing the hallway it was only with great diff
fcultv that the crowd could be forced
back enough to give an exit. The
prisoner. was finally helped into a carriage
and he was driven to Ludlow street jail.
There was another great crowd and there
was again trouble in making a way to the
door. Sharp showed no more signs of i'll
ness than usual Only members of his fami-
.ly were permitted to converse with him.
The court adjourned until July 13, when
sentence will be passed upon the prisoner.
A new trial will be moved for
THE STORY OF THE VERDICT.
The story of the verdict, as told by Juror
Owen O. Schilnmel, is as follows: When the
Jury left the court room at S:52 o'clock they
went directly to the special term court room
to take their ballot. No Juryman knew
then what any other iuryman would vote.
Foreman Garfield made. out tWenty-four
ballots Twelve of the ballots were
marked ''guilty" and twelve mot guilty"
Foreman Garfield gave each juror two bal
lois, one marked guilty" and the other
''not guilty" He then passed around hat
and each juror deposited his ballot therein.
snlt was a verdict of guilty on the first bal
lot, there being no dissenting vote.
Names Liquor Law.